TheElf
Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Al Boone
People keep trying to explain what the developers are trying to do with the airfield rules! I understand and agree! Others keep trying to divert my questions about implimentation and consequences by questioning the philosophy of the rules or delivering cutesy comments! I am only stating that the airfield rules are not sufficiently clear to allow a player to use them properly. I can not rationally follow the "*" phenomenon related to overstacking. Yamato Hugger says that seaplanes count against overstack, which does not seem to relate to Elf's arguments. But I can accept this if I know that it is correct. There is absolutely no clue about the overstack degree of penalty on launches, casualties from attacks and effects on aircraft repairs. The rules on page 214 seem to say that only one HQ can assist in avoiding overstack? I think that various combinations of "Training", "Patrol Level" and "Stand Down" are not allowing cancellation of overstack penalties, at least as far as the bottom screen "*" appearing before the "airfield" name, and we can not identify the consequences amount anyway. Using game v1083c, the TTMW scene has Adak with 4 operational "groups" in combat mode for 2 turns without a "*".
I respectfully disagree with ELF that we do not need to know the degree of consequence for overstacking. As an example, suppose I want to assess the consequences of leaving 2 "groups" of PBYs and their AV ships at a potential overstack airfield base versus moving them to a nearby "dot" base with it's attendant greater danger of surface and air attack. Without knowing the degree of consequence I can not make a rational decision.
The same argument applies to deficient aviation support. Maybe I can live with very deficient aviation support on an air field for a few turns when aviation support is needed elsewhere if I have some idea of the consequences other than the 25% reduction in level bombing flights. Currently a commander has insufficient information to decide.
Al,
Quite simply, don't overstack, and there will be no restrictions. Conversely when you see your AFs are overstacked, just realize that your AF is not operating as efficiently as it might. That is a perfectly natural state for an AF.
If you are new to the game, these rules are not entirely new. Some of them existed in WitP before AE. We've just enhanced them a bit to temper Uber Air Operations. If you attempt to streamline ALL your AFs to maximum efficiency other AFs will likely become overstacked as a result.
There are some benefits to these restrictions. Units will not fly all their A/C (read pilots) all the time and their Fatigue will not suffer as a result. A more normal pace of ops will result than if unchecked.
From the manual:
If a base has less Aviation Support than is required, level bomber offensive missions are reduced by 25%.
- Aviation support isn't just the wrench-turners. It is an abstraction of all things needed to support a plane. Armorers, plane captains, crew drivers, fuel bowsers, ground support equipment, the list goes on and on. Of all types, Level bombers were the most support intensive. This is why this restriction exists. Support your Bombers properly(nothing new here) and it won't be an issue.
If an Airfield has too many aircraft (physical space) or groups (administrative) present, then the airfield is deemed overstacked. And is indicated by an ‘*’ next to the airfield.
An overstacked airfield affects how many aircraft can be launched, casualties from attacks and aircraft repairs.
- Overstacked is not a curse word. It's a fact of life. Don't fixate on the "administrative" word. As designers we INTENDED for AFs to be overstacked. It was part of our effort to slow things down, and defang Air combat a bit.
A 9+ airfield does not suffer from overstacking.
Here is your out. If you can achieve this through any combination of AF building, and HQ manipulation you can be free of the overstacking rule and have a most efficient AF.
An example:
Saipan: Built to Size 4 AF with a 20th Bomber Command radius of 5 will give you a Size 9 AF. Overstack to your hearts content. No penalty. As long as the best Air HQ of the same command as the base which is within range can add its command radius to the number of groups that can be administrated, otherwise if not in the same command, the nearest HQ will add ½ its command radius to the number of groups. At which point you will NOT have a 9 AF and suffer restrictions.
An airfield can operate 50 single engine (or 25 two engine, or 12 four engine) planes per AF size or 1 group per AF size.
- It can also operate more than 50 per AF size or more than the number of groups = or greater than the AF size, but at a penalty. But as I have been trying to say the penalty is intended...
In addition, groups at rest or in training only count as 1/3 for the purposes of counting aircraft at the base, and don’t count at all against the number of groups. Split groups only count as individual groups if they are attached to different HQs.
Here is how you mitigate the overstacking. Without juggling groups. Station 6 groups at a size 4 AF. Set 3 to rest and voila! ( 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 on training + 3 groups on ops), you have four groups, but you haven't moved any groups out. Alternatively you could set them all to CAP or Naval attack and suffer a penalty, but all groups would fly some, most, but not ALL of their complement each phase. It might just be that even with the penalty you'll get more A/c airborne than standing down half your force! Think about it.
Remember if you are seeing something other than what you expect there are OTHER ways to restrict operations.
Level Bombers have to pass 3 checks to fly all their non-overstacked complements. They are:
An experience test»»
A leadership test»»
A morale test in order to fly all of their planes»»
For each test failed, the number of bombers that fly the Mission will be reduced by 25%.
So, don't fly a 40 EXP Bomber unit with a crappy 25 Air Rating LDR, with Morale in the can, and you'll avoid these penalties.
Then there is this:
-If a base has less Aviation Support than is required, level bomber offensive missions are reduced by 25%.
So just because you are expecting to see one thing from your units when you solve the overstacking issue, doesn't necessarily mean you'll get all your LBA into the fight.
"Why are level bombers so roughly treated?" you might ask. Because they didn't operate from forward AFs that were just captured. Generally they operated from rear area bases that had natural or man-made buffers between them and the enemy. Generally. We are trying to limit the pace of Air operations. Somewhat restrictive rules for LBA was a key ingredient.
< Message edited by TheElf -- 8/27/2009 2:57:30 AM >
_____________________________
IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES  |
Printable Version
RE: Airfield Penalties - 
) 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread